Author
Topic: Arrogance abounds at istock (Read 31577 times)

It makes Lobo's comments more understandable. They're not interested in keeping all customers happy, just the ones that will grow with the company and pay the higher prices. To everyone else, "Sorry, good luck," seems like a reasonable response from a company that maybe doesn't care about serving customers in the microstock price range anymore.

If that's the case, then they should just be honest, say that, and stop with the microstock masquerade. At this point it just looks like a big bait and switch. And it they were actually honest about what they are trying to become, then they wouldn't be bothered with the complaints. If they do finally admit they are midstock, I see them fading away, however. I can't help but continue to point to the massive success that was iStockPro. Oh wait...

Even more sad is when I read Lobo is good compared to (some nickname I forget) that used to do what Lobo does now. So everything is just fine, righ?

You know what the difference was back then though? iStock was the rebel agency sticking it to "the man". There was a more rough and tumble, raw feeling to the forums back then. People used to post photos of dildos and say "boobies". A lot of the discussions were no hold barred. Once Getty took over, the company morphed and their image began to change. The juvenile, rude attitude in the forums is now out of step with the rest of the corporate branding.

Logged

Slovenian

Saying prices have been rising steadily across all supply sites is not true, but I suppose people have to say that so that the price increases at iStock don't seem so bad (everyone else is doing it, right?). Someone should direct that buyer to 123RF or StockFresh. Has Shutterstock been raising their prices?

Since the early days of MS, I'm pretty sure most places have raised prices in some way. Unfortunately, buyers still want everything for a buck.

But IS is by far the most expensive and that's the end of it;). Granted it has the best collection, but it also sucks at everything else (it's already been mentioned in this thread and millions of times in others). SS is the leader now and I hope it stays that way, they really deserve it.

Logged

helix7

If that's the case, then they should just be honest, say that, and stop with the microstock masquerade. At this point it just looks like a big bait and switch. And it they were actually honest about what they are trying to become, then they wouldn't be bothered with the complaints. If they do finally admit they are midstock, I see them fading away, however. I can't help but continue to point to the massive success that was iStockPro. Oh wait...

There's no incentive for them to do that. They can exist in both worlds. Act small and microstock-ish, while quietly jacking up prices and raising credit costs while cutting contributor rates.

It's brilliant marketing, really. They've built a reputation as being the cheap-yet-high-quality alternative to traditional RF, even though they're far from cheap in microstock terms these days. If they came out and said "we're not microstock anymore," buyers would really start to bail. As things are now, they can still work the microstock market while becoming a midstock company in terms of price. The buyers who notice the shift and aren't cool with it will leave. But I think it's the buyers who stick around despite the changes that istock really wants to focus on.

Slovenian

Even more sad is when I read Lobo is good compared to (some nickname I forget) that used to do what Lobo does now. So everything is just fine, righ?

You know what the difference was back then though? iStock was the rebel agency sticking it to "the man". There was a more rough and tumble, raw feeling to the forums back then. People used to post photos of dildos and say "boobies". A lot of the discussions were no hold barred. Once Getty took over, the company morphed and their image began to change. The juvenile, rude attitude in the forums is now out of step with the rest of the corporate branding.

It can't be any other way if an american company overtakes it. Puritanism and political correctness takes over and makes everything boring.

Even more sad is when I read Lobo is good compared to (some nickname I forget) that used to do what Lobo does now. So everything is just fine, righ?

Peebert was his name.

He set the tone that Lobo seems to aspire to. How any client facing organisation would tolerate such behaviour has always been a mystery to me.It is indeed a great shame that the only remaining vestage of 'the good old days' is the way that the forums are moderated. Oh that Rob Sylvan would have stayed.

I'm sure Peebert's abrasiveness was somewhat tolerable back in the day. When files were a buck, creatives ran the company, contributors made hobby money, Istock made a few million a year, and buyers had nowhere else to go to get comparable files so they put up with it.

Today, it's probably a $100M+ a year company where buyers have plenty of choices of where to spend their money and a lot of contributors live off of IS money, or IS money is a significant portion of the income.

I wouldn't want Lobo's job. Dealing with the customer service misery every day and probably not able to change anything in the company. Some people are wired to be able to do that kind of work. Lobo isn't. And it Istock's fault for not finding a different role for him/her that's a better fit and getting somebody else who can put on the happy face for angry customers.

velocicarpo

Even more sad is when I read Lobo is good compared to (some nickname I forget) that used to do what Lobo does now. So everything is just fine, righ?

You know what the difference was back then though? iStock was the rebel agency sticking it to "the man". There was a more rough and tumble, raw feeling to the forums back then. People used to post photos of dildos and say "boobies". A lot of the discussions were no hold barred. Once Getty took over, the company morphed and their image began to change. The juvenile, rude attitude in the forums is now out of step with the rest of the corporate branding.

It can't be any other way if an american company overtakes it. Puritanism and political correctness takes over and makes everything boring.

It makes Lobo's comments more understandable. They're not interested in keeping all customers happy, just the ones that will grow with the company and pay the higher prices. To everyone else, "Sorry, good luck," seems like a reasonable response from a company that maybe doesn't care about serving customers in the microstock price range anymore.

If that's the case, then they should just be honest, say that, and stop with the microstock masquerade. At this point it just looks like a big bait and switch. And it they were actually honest about what they are trying to become, then they wouldn't be bothered with the complaints. If they do finally admit they are midstock, I see them fading away, however. I can't help but continue to point to the massive success that was iStockPro. Oh wait...

I don't think there's any way to be honest with where they're headed and not offend people.

Getty is shuffling images into different licensing. RM will be reduced to absolutely unique content and anything that isn't unique will be pushed to RF. Getty and IS RF seem to be converging into the Vetta/Agency tier. Any RF that is oversupplied or low value will stay in IS's lower tier and eventually be pushed to Thinkstock subscription.

That's not what the problem is here - there may be some who don't like microstock prices having risen at all, but the current complaining is about the inability to avoid the 55 credits ($50-75 or so) for a small image.

If the expensive collections could be elminiated from searches when buyers wished to, I think 99.9% of the price complaints would go away.

Logged

jbarber873

It makes Lobo's comments more understandable. They're not interested in keeping all customers happy, just the ones that will grow with the company and pay the higher prices. To everyone else, "Sorry, good luck," seems like a reasonable response from a company that maybe doesn't care about serving customers in the microstock price range anymore.

If that's the case, then they should just be honest, say that, and stop with the microstock masquerade. At this point it just looks like a big bait and switch. And it they were actually honest about what they are trying to become, then they wouldn't be bothered with the complaints. If they do finally admit they are midstock, I see them fading away, however. I can't help but continue to point to the massive success that was iStockPro. Oh wait...

I don't think there's any way to be honest with where they're headed and not offend people.

Getty is shuffling images into different licensing. RM will be reduced to absolutely unique content and anything that isn't unique will be pushed to RF. Getty and IS RF seem to be converging into the Vetta/Agency tier. Any RF that is oversupplied or low value will stay in IS's lower tier and eventually be pushed to Thinkstock subscription.

Well put! or as was recently said elsewhere " Do not ignore the advice from PaulieWalnuts! "

It makes Lobo's comments more understandable. They're not interested in keeping all customers happy, just the ones that will grow with the company and pay the higher prices. To everyone else, "Sorry, good luck," seems like a reasonable response from a company that maybe doesn't care about serving customers in the microstock price range anymore.

If that's the case, then they should just be honest, say that, and stop with the microstock masquerade. At this point it just looks like a big bait and switch. And it they were actually honest about what they are trying to become, then they wouldn't be bothered with the complaints. If they do finally admit they are midstock, I see them fading away, however. I can't help but continue to point to the massive success that was iStockPro. Oh wait...

I don't think there's any way to be honest with where they're headed and not offend people.

Getty is shuffling images into different licensing. RM will be reduced to absolutely unique content and anything that isn't unique will be pushed to RF. Getty and IS RF seem to be converging into the Vetta/Agency tier. Any RF that is oversupplied or low value will stay in IS's lower tier and eventually be pushed to Thinkstock subscription.

In that case, then it doesn't really make sense for them to alienate the small budget buyers like they are. Because they would still need them to support the lower tier.

That's not what the problem is here - there may be some who don't like microstock prices having risen at all, but the current complaining is about the inability to avoid the 55 credits ($50-75 or so) for a small image.

Maybe, but this specific buyer didn't say that. Which is why I tried to poke him a bit to see what his issue was.

Even more sad is when I read Lobo is good compared to (some nickname I forget) that used to do what Lobo does now. So everything is just fine, righ?

Peebert was his name.

He set the tone that Lobo seems to aspire to. How any client facing organisation would tolerate such behaviour has always been a mystery to me.It is indeed a great shame that the only remaining vestage of 'the good old days' is the way that the forums are moderated. Oh that Rob Sylvan would have stayed.

Yeah, but Peebert was there when it was more like a club than a business. He was so off-the-wall I had trouble understanding what he meant half the time.

Slovenian

It makes Lobo's comments more understandable. They're not interested in keeping all customers happy, just the ones that will grow with the company and pay the higher prices. To everyone else, "Sorry, good luck," seems like a reasonable response from a company that maybe doesn't care about serving customers in the microstock price range anymore.

If that's the case, then they should just be honest, say that, and stop with the microstock masquerade. At this point it just looks like a big bait and switch. And it they were actually honest about what they are trying to become, then they wouldn't be bothered with the complaints. If they do finally admit they are midstock, I see them fading away, however. I can't help but continue to point to the massive success that was iStockPro. Oh wait...

I don't think there's any way to be honest with where they're headed and not offend people.

Getty is shuffling images into different licensing. RM will be reduced to absolutely unique content and anything that isn't unique will be pushed to RF. Getty and IS RF seem to be converging into the Vetta/Agency tier. Any RF that is oversupplied or low value will stay in IS's lower tier and eventually be pushed to Thinkstock subscription.

Words of true wisdom, like all of your post in this thread (I haven't come across many since I'm relatively new here). I really admire your analytical capabilities, the way you're able to break things down and see things, patterns that 99.9% ppl don't.

It makes Lobo's comments more understandable. They're not interested in keeping all customers happy, just the ones that will grow with the company and pay the higher prices. To everyone else, "Sorry, good luck," seems like a reasonable response from a company that maybe doesn't care about serving customers in the microstock price range anymore.

If that's the case, then they should just be honest, say that, and stop with the microstock masquerade. At this point it just looks like a big bait and switch. And it they were actually honest about what they are trying to become, then they wouldn't be bothered with the complaints. If they do finally admit they are midstock, I see them fading away, however. I can't help but continue to point to the massive success that was iStockPro. Oh wait...

I don't think there's any way to be honest with where they're headed and not offend people.

Getty is shuffling images into different licensing. RM will be reduced to absolutely unique content and anything that isn't unique will be pushed to RF. Getty and IS RF seem to be converging into the Vetta/Agency tier. Any RF that is oversupplied or low value will stay in IS's lower tier and eventually be pushed to Thinkstock subscription.

Words of true wisdom, like all of your post in this thread (I haven't come across many since I'm relatively new here). I really admire your analytical capabilities, the way you're able to break things down and see things, patterns that 99.9% ppl don't.

he sure does know more than us.. maybe a few more know too..

Logged

XPTO

The buyer probably didn't want to hear my words either, that prices are up everywhere. They just want a way to complain a bit and aren't really looking for suggestions. "Sorry, good luck" is probably an ok way to leave the vent where it is and move on.

I used to work in a specialized team in the Complains Department inside a major company, where I solved cases of major clients and even the stockholders, which were among the most important companies of my country.

One thing we knew (and it's proven) is that when you loose one costumer because of a complain you'll lose in average 20 others along time because the one that left will tell continuously his story aggravating the discontentment others may also feel, and prevent many new costumers to come to your company as they get afraid to experience the same.

Doing this in a "public" forum where other costumers get to see the conversation is impossible to classify!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

It doesn't matter if it's a bad client, or he's just venting and won't listen to others anyway. Other people, and especially clients won't know that. The only thing they see is someone who may be an excellent costumer being "f*ck you" publicly.

There are a million ways to say goodbye to a client that will leave, but keep a good "personal" relation with the employee that is the face of the company to him, and in a public forum keep a good image of the company. If the company is polite and respectful it's even possible that other clients dismiss the critique made by the angry costumer. But not a chance with the way that brainless animal solved it!

But hey, if he's buying from other agencies where I have 3x my portfolio and pay much higher commissions, as a matter of fact I think I have to thank Lobo!!!

Yeah, but Peebert was there when it was more like a club than a business. He was so off-the-wall I had trouble understanding what he meant half the time.

Glad you said that. I always thought that there was a party going on, everyone was drunk or high but me because I never got the joke or got what they were saying.

OK, now I've got some moral support and maybe won't look so stupid I'll come clean: I never had a bally clue what he was on about. I thought it was just me, being old and so unhip my legs are likely to fall off.

Is "Sorry, good luck" really that offensive? Customer service is really bad in the UK but I think we prefer a bit of honesty to words that mean nothing. I really don't like it when people are trying to be nice but they don't do anything to fix what I'm complaining about.